Skip to content
The Garden Club of America at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Garden Club of America

The purpose of THE GARDEN CLUB OF AMERICA is to stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening, to share the advantages of association by means of educational meetings, conferences, correspondence, and publications, and to restore, improve, and protect the quality of the environment through educational programs and action in the fields of…

$815k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
11
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$702kFood & Nutrition$190kRecreation & Sports$50kPhilanthropy$10kEducation$10kHousing & Shelter$10k
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 15 grants below total $180,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $815,281 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $635,281 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$10,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$66M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE$40,000
THE GARDEN CLUB OF HOUSTON$10,000
FOUNDERS GARDEN CLUB OF DALLAS$10,000
THE FRENCH BROAD RIVER GARDEN CLUB FOUNDATIONN$10,000
PERENNIAL PLANTERS GC$10,000
MILLBROOK GARDEN CLUB$10,000
HORTULUS INC$10,000
TRUSTEES GARDEN CLUB$10,000
ARIZONA COLUMBINE GARDEN CLUB$10,000
GARDEN CLUB OF AIKEN$10,000
THE TUCKAHOE GARDEN CLUB OF WESTHAMPTON$10,000
THE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF MEMPHIS$10,000
SAND HILLS GARDEN CLUB$10,000
ST GEORGE'S GARDEN CLUB$10,000
WESTHAMPTON GARDEN CLUB$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 67% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ARIZONA COLUMBINE GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 11%THE LENOX GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 12%BEACON HILL GARDEN CLUB: $30k → 16%GARDEN CLUB OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY: $10k → 11%WISSAHICKON GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 22%WOODSIDE ATHERTON GC: $10k → 7%PIEDMONT GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 10%THE GARDEN CLUB OF HONOLULU: $10k → 9%WESTHAMPTON GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 7%THE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE: $40k → 9%GARDEN CLUB OF ORANGE & DUTCHESS COUNTIES: $10k → 14%GERTRUDE WINDSOR GARDEN CLUB: $40k → 12%FOUNDERS GARDEN CLUB OF DALLAS: $10k → 14%GARDEN CLUB OF HOUSTON: $10k → 16%MAGNOLIA GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 19%GARDEN CLUB OF AIKEN: $10k → 17%LITTLE ROCK GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 17%GARDEN CLUB OF PALM BEACH: $10k → 11%GARDEN CLUB OF HALIFAX COUNTRY: $13k → 12%CEDAR RAPIDS GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 9%DES MOINES FOUNDERS GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 10%THE GARDEN CLUB OF ST LOUIS: $10k → 11%MILLBROOK GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 9%HORTULUS INC: $10k → 9%GARDEN CLUB OF HARTFORD: $10k → 11%MEMPHIS GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 17%THE FRENCH BROAD RIVER GARDEN CLUB FOUNDATIONN: $10k → 12%TWIN CITY GC: $30k → 15%PERENNIAL PLANTERS GC: $10k → 14%TRUSTEES GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 16%SAND HILLS GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 18%GARDEN CLUB OF DAYTON: $10k → 14%LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF COLUMBUS: $10k → 15%SHAKER LAKES GC: $10k → 17%SEATTLE GARDEN CLUB: $30k → 9%KANAWHA GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 18%KENILWORTH GARDEN CLUB: $30k → 14%THE GARDEN CLUB OF NASHVILLE: $12k → 23%GARDEN CLUB OF MADISON: $10k → 4%GARDEN CLUB OF SOMERSET HILLS: $10k → 5%GARDEN CLUB OF EVANSTON: $30k → 7%STONY BROOK GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 11%WINCHESTER-CLARKE GARDEN CLUB: $30k → 7%GLENVIEW GARDEN CLUB: $10k → 8%THE TUCKAHOE GARDEN CLUB OF WESTHAMPTON: $10k → 22%NEW ORLEANS TOWN GARDENERS: $10k → 15%STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $15k → 10%THE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE: $40k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
WA
IL
NY
MA
IA
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
AR
TN
NC
SC
HI
LA
MS
GA
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

32%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$310k · 9 repeat orgs$662k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +4% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
42

Total granted

$310k
$552k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4%
0%

Still filing today

67%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $110k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentFood & NutritionPhilanthropyOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • TL
    THE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $90k · revenue -29% · 71% of their budget
  • TG
    TEXAS GARDEN CLUBS INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $50k
  • GC
    GARDEN CLUB OF ORANGE & DUTCHESS COUNTIES INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $30k · revenue -26% · 30% of their budget

Funded once

  • TC
    TWIN CITY GARDEN CLUB
    one grant, 2021 · $30k
  • BH
    BEACON HILL GARDEN CLUB
    one grant, 2017 · $30k · revenue +8%
  • SG
    Seattle Garden Club Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue -4%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Thomasville Garden Club Inc
Environment
2
Columbia Garden Club Foundation
Environment
3
Hillsborough Garden Club Trust
Environment
4
Garden Club of Madison Inc

The garden club of madison inc.'s mission is to stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening, to share the advantages of association by means of educational meetings, conferences and publications and to restore, improve and protect the…

Environment
5
Garden Club of Alexandria

to stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening and garden-related arts; to restore, improve, and protect the natural world through conservation and education in environmental stewardship; to promote civic planting and beautification; and…

Environment
6
Garden Club of the Back Bay Inc

Promote Civic Beauty, improve, advance, and encourage horticultural improvements, ornament the streets and public squares of the City of Boston, especially the

Environment
7
Green Tree Garden Club Inc

To conduct programs to promote an understanding of and appreciation for conserving natural resources, to encourage interest in gardening, and to promote interest and research in conservation and horticulture.

Environment
8
Santa Rosa Garden Club

The vision of the Santa Rosa Garden Club is to stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening, horticulture and floriculture among the membership and the general public and to promote and participate in the restoration, improvement, and…

Environment
9
Garden Club of Somerset Hills

To further knowledge of horticulture and flowers.

Environment
10
Fauquier and Loudoun Garden Club

To stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening through educational meetings, conferences, correspondence and publications and to protect the quality of the environment.

Environment
11
Bay Area Gardeners Association

Inform and update members with seminaries

—
12
Rumson Garden Club

To stimulate the knowledge and love of gardening.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Trustees' Garden Club Inc; the most unlike its peers is Beaumont Botanical Gardens Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

50 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 50 of the 62 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

11
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
50/50
Grantees still filing
21/50
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BEACON HILL GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 · EnvironmentBEACON HILL GARDEN CLUBGARDEN CLUB OF ORANGE & DUTCHESS COUNTIES INC: $30,000 · EnvironmentGARDEN CLUB OF ORANGE & DUTCHESS COUNTIES INCSeattle Garden Club Inc: $30,000 · EnvironmentSeattle Garden Club IncKENILWORTH GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 · EnvironmentKENILWORTH GARDEN CLUBGarden Club of Houston: $20,000 · EnvironmentGarden Club of Allegheny County: $20,000 · Environment+32 more: $326,840 · Environment+32 moreTHE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE INC: $90,000 · OtherTHE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE INCTEXAS GARDEN CLUBS INC: $50,000 · OtherTEXAS GARDEN CLUBS INCTWIN CITY GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 · OtherTWIN CITY GARDEN CLUBLITTLE ROCK GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 · OtherLITTLE ROCK GARDEN CLUBWINCHESTER-CLARKE GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 · OtherWINCHESTER-CLARKE GARDEN CLUBGARDEN CLUB OF EVANSTON: $30,000 · OtherGARDEN CLUB OF EVANSTONLENOX GARDEN CLUB: $20,000 · OtherPERENNIAL PLANTERS GARDEN CLUB INC: $20,000 · OtherTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $15,000 · Other+13 more: $130,000 · Other+13 moreST GEORGES GARDEN CLUB INC: $30,000 · Food & NutritionNEW ORLEANS TOWN GARDENERS INC: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$486,840Other$445,000Food & Nutrition$30,000Philanthropy$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE LITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF RYE INC: $90,000 over 3y, 71% of budgetBEACON HILL GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetGARDEN CLUB OF ORANGE & DUTCHESS COUNTIES INC: $30,000 over 3y, 30% of budgetST GEORGES GARDEN CLUB INC: $30,000 over 3y, 15% of budgetLITTLE ROCK GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 over 3y, 9.3% of budgetSeattle Garden Club Inc: $30,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetKENILWORTH GARDEN CLUB: $30,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetGarden Club of Houston: $20,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetGarden Club of Allegheny County: $20,000 over 2y, 8.0% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES: $13,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGARDEN CLUB OF THE HALIFAX COUNTRY: $12,500 over 1y, 14% of budgetTHE GARDEN CLUB OF NASHVILLE: $12,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetCEDAR RAPIDS GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 40% of budgetGARDEN CLUB OF SANTA BARBARA: $10,000 over 1y, 9.4% of budgetTHREE HARBORS GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetFOUNDERS GARDEN CLUB OF DALLAS: $10,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetNORTH COUNTRY GARDEN CLUB OF LONG ISLAND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetThe Garden Club of Dayton Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetCOLUMBINE GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetALBEMARLE GARDEN CLUB INC: $10,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetMEMPHIS GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetMAGNOLIA GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetMILLBROOK GARDEN CLUB INC: $10,000 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetGARDEN STUDY CLUB OF NEW ORLEANS: $10,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetWoodside-Atherton Garden Club: $10,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetSHAKER LAKES GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetRiver Oaks Garden Club: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBEAUMONT BOTANICAL GARDENS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetNEW ORLEANS TOWN GARDENERS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetDES MOINES FOUNDERS GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetGlenview Garden Club Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 36% of budgetFRENCH BROAD RIVER GARDEN CLUB FDN: $10,000 over 1y, 8.7% of budgetWISSAHICKON GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetWESTHAMPTON GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetHORTULUS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetGROW IT GREEN MORRISTOWN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSHREVEPORT GARDEN STUDY CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 8.9% of budgetGARDEN CLUB OF ENGLEWOOD INC: $10,000 over 1y, 53% of budgetPIEDMONT GARDEN CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetTHE GARDEN CLUB OF HONOLULU: $10,000 over 1y, 8.7% of budgetLITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF MEMPHIS: $10,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetTHE GARDEN CLUB OF ST LOUIS: $10,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetLITTLE GARDEN CLUB OF COLUMBUS: $10,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetGREEN SPRING VALLEY GARDEN CLUB INC: $10,000 over 1y, 8.6% of budgetTHE GARDEN CLUB OF PALM BEACH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN CORPORATION: $8,840 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO1.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Garden Club of America funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Garden Club of America. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    8get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 62 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Garden Club of America’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home